FREDY VILLANUEVA-MORAN V. ERIC HOLDER, JR., No. 11-71442 (9th Cir. 2013)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS DEC 02 2013 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT FREDY OSWALDO VILLANUEVAMORAN, No. 11-71442 Agency No. A077-284-100 Petitioner, MEMORANDUM* v. ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Submitted November 19, 2013** Before: CANBY, TROTT, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges. Fredy Oswaldo Villanueva-Moran, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals ( BIA ) order denying his second motion to reopen removal proceedings. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). reopen. Toufighi v. Mukasey, 538 F.3d 988, 992 (9th Cir. 2008). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review. The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Villanueva-Moran s second motion to reopen as untimely and number-barred where the motion was filed over three years after the agency s final order, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and Villanueva-Moran failed to demonstrate changed circumstances in Guatemala to qualify for the regulatory exception to the time limit for filing motions to reopen, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3)(ii); see also Toufighi, 538 F.3d at 996. We lack jurisdiction to review Villanueva-Moran s contentions related to humanitarian asylum and equitable tolling based on ineffective assistance of counsel regarding his asylum claim because he failed to raise them to the BIA. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 677-78 (9th Cir. 2004). We also lack jurisdiction to review the BIA s decision not to reopen under its sua sponte authority. See Mejia-Hernandez v. Holder, 633 F.3d 818, 823-24 (9th Cir. 2011). We reject Villanueva-Moran s contentions that the BIA ignored his change-of-law arguments and insufficiently explained its reasoning. Finally, we deny Villanueva-Moran s request for attorney fees. PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part. 2 11-71442

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.